Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Requests class: review and improve decompression methods #596

Open
jrfnl opened this issue Nov 6, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

Requests class: review and improve decompression methods #596

jrfnl opened this issue Nov 6, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@jrfnl
Copy link
Member

jrfnl commented Nov 6, 2021

As per #595:

The methods covered via the DecompressionTest test class need a lot more tests, in particular the Requests::compatible_gzinflate() method, which includes code paths currently completely untested and handling of ZIP file format, which when called from Requests::decompress() (which is the only way it is called from within the Requests library itself), can never be reached as the "magic markers" used by ZIP are not included in the Requests::$magic_compression_headers property.

A future iteration should do a more in-depth review of these two method to determine what should be handled by each method and add additional tests.

@jrfnl jrfnl added this to the 2.1.0 milestone Nov 6, 2021
@jrfnl jrfnl changed the title Requests class; review and improve decompression methods Requests class: review and improve decompression methods Nov 7, 2021
@schlessera
Copy link
Member

The test cases in the DecompressionTest::dataDeflate() test look like the byte streams are messed. It looks like these are GZIP headers with ZLIB compressed data. This test scenario needs to be investigated, and this probably also means the code we currently have for decompression is not properly interpreting the headers.

@jrfnl
Copy link
Member Author

jrfnl commented Nov 25, 2021

Other related issues: #135, #152, #153, #437

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants